Ticket price USD 465.00
   Taxes, Fees and charges USD 540.52
   ---------
   International/Domestic Surcharge USD 350.00

   APHIS User Fee USD 3.96

   Immigration User Fee USD 7.00

   Customs User Fee USD 5.77

   United States International Departure Tax USD 18.60

   United States International Arrival Tax USD 18.60

   Passenger Civil Aviation Security Service Fee USD 5.60

   Air Transport Tax USD 46.58

   German Aviation Security Charge  19.15

   Passenger Service Charge - Intl USD 23.95

   Passenger Service Charge - Dom. USD 36.81

   Passenger Facility Charge USD 4.50

   Total price USD 1,005.52

Flights within Europe are not that heavily taxed, otherwise I wouldn't be able to fly Berlin - Brussels for 9 Euros.

For comparison, I had a vehicle breakdown and needed to take an (awful) bus that distance in the US, and it cost far more than $23 (IIRC, it was ~$75 and took 18 hours).

It isn't: Air Berlin, Monarch, Primera, Small Planet, Azur, Cobalt, VLM, PrivatAir, Icelandic carrier WOW.

Primera and WOW were in trouble because they couldn't offset losses on their long-haul with anything.

I mean... I will not consider lower confort on transatlantic route, while sub 3 hour flights Ryanair is actually great.

Though even at profitability, the flights in EU are typically cheaper.

Flights in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus are very expensive... They are in Europe as well.

How is it so low? Even with all subsidies, kinda hard to believe

As with many things, the game with taxes is how to make the incidence of the tax fall more on the consumer and less on the producer. If you can accomplish that, then the tax is more likely to get through because unfortunately we don't have consumer lobbyists anywhere as strong as the business lobbyists.

I used to be a great proponent of Norwegian... but now... They cost as much, with less flexibility.

https://miltonfriedman.hoover.org/friedman_images/Collection...

Basically, if demand for a product is inelastic (eg. cigarettes, insulin) that will pretty much be 100% passed on to customers by the business. You can see the supplied link for examples where the seller has no choice but to eat the tax (or most of it) or people will just stop purchasing.

[1] https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/microec...

The rest are actual charges that airports/government services levy for work done, as well as the famed fuel surcharge (usually recently noted as international/domestic surcharge) that airlines use as an wildcard addendum to the base fare of the ticket.

  APHIS User Fee USD 3.96
  Immigration User Fee USD 7.00
  Customs User Fee USD 5.77
  United States International Departure Tax USD 18.60
  United States International Arrival Tax USD 18.60
  Passenger Civil Aviation Security Service Fee USD 5.60
  Air Transport Tax USD 46.58
  German Aviation Security Charge  19.15

Thats insane revenue, you would expect at least a good service from it.

In Germany consumer electricity prices have a comparable fraction of taxes and fees. So do salaries for high-paying jobs. If these levels are tolerable we can certainly go higher.

Boeing and Airbus are two of the most heavily subsidized companies in the world, and the airlines themselves aren’t far behind. They’re both high-risk, low-margin businesses.

I've talked to a bunch of people that get flown around by their company for 2h meetings at airports within Germany every day. If these wouldn't happen and would be done via video conferencing or other means that would be an improvement. Business will find a way to make it work.

It is a Boeing 737-200 and it has been in service for 43.7 years.

There are still DC-3's in commercial operation, and production of those ended in 1942.

http://www.buffaloairways.com/ is one operator.

Common definition of a "commercial operation" for airlines is scheduled operation, not charters.

So... That boeing just may be the oldest flying airliner on scheduled routes.

Are there any such planes used for regular scheduled (passenger) airline services? It appears to me that Buffalo Airways is charter and cargo only.

Jets don’t like that.

For back country missions the only thing maybe better than a DC-3 is a Basler... and that is a modernized DC-3 with reinforcements and turboprops for more power. They suck a lot more fuel than a plain DC3 though, which can be problematic as some of these fields they have to fly fuel in.

Competition makes those companies use any cost-saving they can. If the government takes an option away, they'll just all not use it anymore and settle down on a higher price.

Competition between governments is also a thing, and I think we’re already seeing it matter as part of a pullback on globalization with respect to China.

And let's not resort to the No True Scotsman fallacy ...

Is it? Why? Frequent air travel is super recent.

The world changes. I travel all over the world for business. Contracts that I couldn't do without that travel. Just because 50 years ago I wouldn't be able to do it, doesn't mean it isn't necessary now. (Same as internet, just because 50 years ago you didn't need, or have, the internet, doesn't mean nowadays is an integral part of business)

Then the business world can pay for it through ticket prices.

If air travel is essential to operate the economy itself, people will pay for it without subsidies, and cut down on non essentials, if need be.

Apple, the posterchild of high margins, reported profits of $14bn on $62bn revenues for Q4 2018... that's 22%. If you want low margins, look at retailers.

I wish it was mandatory for every student to visit two or three very different countries during their studies.

I understand the emissions are problematic and we need to cut them down. I like the idea of forbidding or de-incentivizing air travel on short trips when a rail alternative exists. I just wish we put that at the bottom of the priority list. Remove coal plants and fuel cars first.

That was common in the 80s & 90s but we did it wearing a backpack and hopping on buses and coaches and sleeper trains; air travel was much too expensive back then.

That's in contrast to modern Ryanair-style stag-party 'tourism' where students descend on a city for a few days and then zip back home.

If the entire world went to nuclear power tomorrow, the climate impact of air travel wouldn’t even be a rounding error. Power generation is the biggest contributor to pollution. Airplanes are barely a few percentage points and airplanes in France have such an infinitesimal influence on world climate that the whole exercise is a joke and smacks of self-congratulatory virtue signaling more than any actual solution. Remember the politics here: the cheminots in France have extraordinary power: they can shut down the country on a whim — anything that harms air travel directly benefits one of the most powerful unions in France.

I guess the French want fewer people visiting their country?

I do not see any evidence that this is their goal. They would consider it an unfortunate side effect of a necessary environmental policy.

I don't think the policy has anything to do with tourism.

I suppose the Airlines will just pass along any new taxes to the traveling consumer. I was always under the impression that airports in France were economic drivers of prosperity considering tourism makes up about 77 billion euro of economic impact to the GDP France.

Hope it works out for them...

Well, yeah, but what is the problem with that? The price increase thus decreasing the demand of flights, achieving the goal.

Because Airlines seem to be the intended target and not the tourist. I would imagine they would have instituted an airport fee if the tourist was the target.

>The price increase thus decreasing the demand of flights, achieving the goal.

This could cause a drop in tourist dollars but maybe that's the goal. It seems Europe in general is wary of tourists. Spain has gone so far as to discourage tourism to Barcelona by restricting any new hotels or tourist accommodations. France may be following their lead and taxing Airlines instead, creating less across the whole country instead of a particular city.

That's not an unfortunate consequence, that's the idea.